When you have 3.6 Billion adherents

Published November 27th, 2010 by Bobby Henderson

When you have 3.6 Billion adherents to your faith, we can start talking about teaching your ideas in school. When you think you’re right or not the decision on whether or not to teach creationism in school should come from the majority and the fact is 82.3% of Americans are christian and therefore believe that the earth was created by God and only 11.6 are unaffiliated with a religion, of which only a fraction are atheist or agnostic. Take out the agnostics because if they’re really agnostic they won’t care what’s being taught in school, and we’re talking about a small number of really loud people that are trying to force their beliefs on the rest of the country. How messed up is that. I’m not going to force my beliefs on you. I think that’s why they did the whole separation of church and state thing, so that a certain belief system, Evolution included, would not be forced upon the population. So teach evolution, go ahead, I know for a fact that Brigham Young University and Brigham Young University Idaho, two christian schools teach evolution in their required classes, but if you’re going to teach one THEORY, and I emphasize theory not fact, then give credence to other theories that bare any social impact on our society. Like how about a theory that more than 50% of the world subscribes to? Anyway, peace be the journey, I give you credit for some funny stuff, like pirates and global warming, but don’t pretend to take nothing seriously if you actually do have very serious agenda. –Jordan

All religions go through a phase of perceived fakeness. Funny you bring up BYU. Mormonism got a lot of criticism for years because Joseph Smith used seer stones to find the location of their original scriptures and translate them from unknown languages. Some might say that sounds like BS. But with time and pressure it becomes a religion. Not unlike the formation of rocks. I am a scientist first, remember.

People are dying as you read this sentence. People are killing other people. People are dying of starvation. People are dying of horrible diseases.

What is death? It’s the abrupt end of life. But what is life? It is a complex conglomeration of chemicals and cells, combined in ways that allow it to find ways to create brand shiny new conglomerations of chemicals just like them. That is life’s and humans’ only purpose. But there is one major obstacle in these conglomerations’ way: death. It’s when all of the biological functions of the human body stop, thus causing the conglomeration of chemicals to be useless, crushing all its hopes of ever creating new conglomerations of chemicals. Humans are very special. They have shaped the world around them to make avoiding death easy. But this new way of life does have its downfalls. Humans have gotten foolish ideas that they are better than others. It makes no sense, but somehow that’s what they think. Thus they feel comfortable in killing people–the deliberate cause of death in another. Such is the cause of all wars, poverty, and human-caused misery. Overall, a greater fraction of all the people die now than they did when things were simpler, and there was no technology.

Now I shall give a parody on what happened next.

A long time ago, when people still lived in caves, there was a tribe of humans who had the belief that feces was a “super food,” and that it was the only food they needed. Then one day, a caveman named Og was walking through the forest when he saw a beehive. He reached in and took honey, and ate it. It was delicious beyond all belief. Og told all the other cavemen about the honey, and how delicious it was. People stopped eaing feces and began to eat honey. The feces-eaters tried to get the honey-eaters to go back to feces, but once they had tasted honey, they weren’t able to go back. Soon, everyone but a stubborn caveman named Ok ate honey.

Ok kept trying to get everyone to go back to eating feces. He used tactics like laughing at them when they were hungry and had to search for honey. He could have his “food” whenever he wanted. Soon, a few people did start to feel inconvenienced when they got their food. Little by little, people started eating feces again. Just a little at first, but then more and more. Soon, the majority of people ate feces. They glutted on it, gorging themselves with fecal matter. The few honey-eaters left started feeling left out during feasts, not being able to get food whenever they wanted. So they started eating just a little. Then more and more, until their diet completely consisted of feces.

Soon, everyone but Og ate feces. People laughed at Og and made fun of him for the effort he had to go to to get his food. But Og wouldn’t be swayed. He said, “You guys are retarded. You’re eating shit. It’s disgusting and it will kill you.” But they just laughed and continued to indulge in feces consumption.

And eventually, everyone got terribly sick. They all laid on the floor of the cave, dying. Then Ok told the rest his story: “When I was a child, long ago, before Og first found honey, I found honey. It was deliciouis, so delicious that I couldn’t let anyone else know about it. It was my wonderful secret. Then one day, I found a big beehive, and I ate it quickly and greedily. Then I got bees in my mouth and they stung my tongue. Ever since, I couldn’t taste honey. I was devastated at the loss. And I was forced to eat feces, which, ironically, I could taste. When Og found the honey that I had tried to keep from you, I was jealous. I was angry that they could enjoy the wonders of honey while I couldn’t. And if I couldn’t have it, no one could. So I convinced all of you to eat feces. And it worked! I couldn’t believe it! You’re such idiots! I fooled all you suckers, and I don’t regret it! Except I couldn’t fool Og. You were too smart for me.” But he was dying anyway.

So everyone lay there, slowly dying and loathing Ok.

Human contemplation over the years has resulted in a lot of very intelligent people. Philosophers realized that such evils in the world were not good. Some people saw that when people do bad things, it destroys them. Could it ever not be so? What human could not be damaged emotionally after causing death in one who he knows in his heart is just like him? For a time, a number of people knew the axiom that bad things are bad. As time went on, however, people did not care so much. They gave up trying not to destroy themselves. Soon, they lied to themselves, convincing themselves that bad things are not so bad. Soon, more and more crime and evildoing was generated. Soon, someone said, “Bad things are bad,” but the rest laughed and say “Oh, you old-fashioned thinker. You are so foolish. Bad things are not bad! Bad things are fine! Come, do some bad things!” But he said, “No. You guys are retarded. You’re destroying yourselves, and it will be the death of you.” But they kept doing it anyway.

Reaper,
I couldn’t agree more, having no faith and instead using logic and reason to strive for truth is so much like the search for honey. It is difficult to find but so much more rewarding than just giving up and eating the shit fed to you by others or worse eating the shit you create in your own little cave. Now you do have those people like Ok who are hurt by the truth of the world around them and so choose to reject it and worse lure others back to their shit eating faith.
Danimal

I am now retired, but worked for a large local government for 22 years, after 25 years in private work. The people I worked with, and most I came in contact with, genuinely valued public service — as in “doing good for the people.” I really object to Keith’s kinds of comments. Without public servants, you would not have roads, airports, libraries, parks, many museums, much art, police, fire protections, etc etc — and yes, some protections for those less fortunate than most of the rest of us. By the way, many I worked with could have made more money working for the private sector — and many did as the lesser salaries became insupportable in some areas of public service. Under a conservative government, for a period of time my local government started contracting out some work to private companies. Some savings for some kinds of work, but overall the costs turned out to be considerably more. Of course there is waste, just as there is in private business (look into your own experiences), but in my experience less waste and much mythology about it.

You say a greater fraction of people die now than when things were simpler. I was born in 1932. Things were a lot simpler then, believe me. In 1932, the population of the earth was 2 billion. By the year 2000, the earth’s poulation had climbed to 6 billion. In 2011, barring the apocalypse or some other horrendous event, there will be 7 billion people on the planet.

Hence, I conclude that you and your parable are both full of shit. Get back to your caprophagia, turdsnapper.

POSTSCRIPT: Why did the population climb so rapidly in the 20th Century? Because of new-fangled advances in medicine and agriculture. The very things that you, Grim Reaper, say are terrible. Agricultural science made it possible for more people to live on the planet and medical knowledge slowed the death rate.

I am not endorsing an ever-increasing population. There is a limit on how many people can reasonably live on the earth. The Reverend Thomas Malthus published his “Essay On The Principle Of Population” in 1798, and that essay still describes the peril of population outgrowing resources. Science has made birth control possible, and mankind should be practicing it more intensely,

Not to worry, Atsap. The population explosion is slowing rapidly, and even reversed itself in most industrialized countries. By the end of this century, world population will be decreasing.

A hundred years ago it was financially advantageous to have children; now it’s a burden, and the birth control measures you mentioned have decoupled (pun intended) sex from child-bearing.

The pope, Islamic fundamentalists and Xtian preachers are united in trying to maintain traditional marriage and their moral order, but it’s a losing battle. Another reason why religious affiliation is shrinking, and will accelerate.

One of the potential problems in the “developed” world is that the people who are likely to breed the most are those who don’t think. Not so much a genetic as a cultural thing. Cyril Kornbluth was rather perceptive when he wrote “The Marching Morons”. Ignoring the political incorrectness, the story forewarned of some of the things we face today: noisy drivers, insensitivity to violence, mass advertising and a total cultural collapse

Blackbeardsays:

December 30, 2010 at 11:53 PM

Ok, you’re right. Evolution IS a theory. BUT, let me ask you this, do you know what the scientific definition of a theory is? Many people don’t, and it’s such a shame that they base their arguments of of such silly premises like: ‘Evolution is just a theory that can’t be proven.’ Do your self a favor and go read a book, or perhaps, one of these handy articles that I’ve provided for you right here be means of these links! Have fun! :D

You’ll notice something that seems to appear in several of these articles and definition websites over and over again! They all state that a theory is:

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Oh! would you look at that! what pops out? how about ‘facts!’ Or, ‘repeatedly tested?’ what about our good old friend ‘widely accepted?’ Ever heard of the ‘Theory of Gravity?’ I bet you’re proving that one right now! I hope this has opened your ignorant eyes to the marvelous world around you and I, and taught you that there’s a clear difference between a theory, and a religious belief. And, if you’re not satisfied by my argument, why don’t you go read about the topic you seem to have so much trouble with? Here’s a great book to help you with that! (and with used copies from $5.59, it’s a must have!)

My story represents anything bad in the world. Find a problem, and it can be compared to this story. Bad things are bad for the bad person and others.

Atheism and theism can be summed up in steps. We know the universe exists. Theists think a self-existent God created the universe. Atheists remove that step, and say the universe is self-existent. I’d like to believe that there is no self-existence…that there are infinite steps. Therefore all of reality has an inherent meaning for existence. None of this self-existence crap. Everything exists, and for a purpose. But I can’t prove it. I can’t prove anything. The universe isn’t governed by laws of what seems beautiful, or purposeful. We have no reason to believe it is.

I don’t know if there is a cause for all our existence. But it seems right. I don’t know if the universe is self-existent. But that seems right-feeling, too. But in the end, I can’t know, so I don’t pretend I can like many atheists. Then some find a God hard to believe. But if you stumble at mere believability, what are you living for? Isn’t love hard to believe? Love is hard to believe, ask any lover. Life is hard to believe, ask any scientist. God is hard to believe, ask any believer. What is your problem with hard to believe?

I have nothing more to say. These are the undeniable facts. If you disagree, then disagree, but you’re just kidding yourself, and you should know that. Happy New Year, pastafarians.

You are stumbling and bumbling over the word “believe.” To believe is to accept a thing without proof. I never cease to wonder at the things people have and do believe: witches, geocentric universe, global flood, demons, over 3,000 different gods. And that’s just a fewof the delusional, often proven false, beliefs of mankind.

You claim that you have stated undeniable facts. You “believe” that everything exists for a purpose; you “feel” that certain ideas are right. You are correct when you state that you “can prove nothing.” So what kind of snake oil are you selling? You have just admitted that you are an agnostic. Based on that, you are a kindred spirit, ready to become a fully-feathered Pastafarian. Welcome to our club.

Um, no, “believe” means to think that something is true, with no distinctions, you can believe that the world is round. You’re adding stuff. Perhaps it has connotations to being unsure of the fact, but that wasn’t my meaning, so let’s just ignore that. I don’t “believe” that everything exists for a purpose; if you payed closer attention, you’d notice that I stated that I’d like to believe that. But I don’t, because I can prove nothing. Or at least not that way. But if there is a kingdom in the sky, then we can, can’t we? And no one can prove that there’s not. It’s logically impossible. So how can you claim otherwise?

No, Grim Reaper, there’s no way I can “believe” the world is sperical (not round, you dolt). I KNOW the world is spherical. This has been demonstrated to my satisfaction, most recently by pictures looking back from space. Your “Kingdom In The Sky” as you say, can’t be proven, but if you want to believe it, go ahead. Make a sign and stand on a street corner in Times Square. Make sure and grow a beard and wear sandals.

Yeeesh!
AR
‘

Drained and Washed Cleansays:

January 1, 2011 at 7:15 PM

I think you are confusing “hard to believe” with “hard to explain”. Love is hard to explain. I don’t have to “believe” it exists. It does. I see it everyday. Life is hard to explain, but not impossible. I, again, don’t have to “believe” it exists. It does. I’m here. We have begun explaining how life began (comets, amino acids, evolution).

Religion and gods were created for the exact purpose of explaining things that we didn’t know how to explain. At first that was thunder, lightning, rain, earthquakes, hurricanes, rainbows… All attributed to a god being angry or happy or sad.

What you are asking is “how am I here if there is no god”. I’m sorry that science has not yet delivered the answer to how the universe was created, but that doesn’t mean that a god did it. You need a god to feel there is a purpose for your life. You need a god to feel like you have all the answers. You need to feel that you won’t cease to exist when you die. That is fine, but we don’t. We create our own purpose. We are willing to do the research and wait for actual results before we claim to have any answers. We have accepted our mortality. You should try it.

I’m not confusing them–that’s an honest mistake, though. Actually, I got that quote from a book called Life of Pi. It’s a good book, I recommend it. In the book an Indian is trapped on a lifeboat with a zebra, a hyena, a babboon, and a 450-pound Bengal tiger. People question him about the boat that crashed, and they didn’t believe his story. It was hard to believe. Also, they landed on an island made of algae that was biologically connected with trees in the algae, and they worked together to catch fish around them and “eat” them. Also hard to believe. The questioners told him it was botanically impossible. Then bonsai trees, tiny trees that aren’t rooted into the ground, came up in conversation, and the Indian–Piscine was his name–claimed that bonsai trees were botanically impossible. Thus I conclude that “hard to believe” is not the same as “impossible.”

I am not asking “how am I here if there is no god.” I am asking “how am I here.” And I highly doubt that science will ever, ever find why. Scientific progress so far has been good, but we’re only human. We will never find the meaning of the universe. Like I said, we exist only to survive long enough to reproduce, not to find the meaning of the universe.

Well, if that Indian guy had managed to provide hair strands from all those animals, or at least show hoof and claw marks left on the boat, the story would have been more believable. Same goes for those algae trees.

“Impossible” is actually not a scietific term. I don’t think you’ll find it in any official journal or experimental data log. Even the infamous “faster-than-light” problem has its workarounds.
The word I’d suggest is “unreliable”. The Indian’s story is unreliable due to lack of evidence. Bonsai trees, OTOH, are well recorded in history, so claims of impossibility are more than far-fetched.

As for the “meaning of the Universe” , since there is so far no evidence of conscious intention there, the question of “why” is irrelevant, replaced by the much simpler “how”. And the answer so far is likely a 10-page formula. Too bad if it doesn’t fit your philosophy, but that’s science for you.

Danimalsays:

January 3, 2011 at 9:36 AM

Crazy troll is crazy

Keithsays:

January 3, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Bonsai trees were originally (and still are in some cases) trees that had grown in rock cracks. They had survived all odds against them and grown in miniature due to poor nourishment and lack of root space. There is nothing biologically impossible about them. They are simply evidence that the FSM in its divine wisdom did not stop at creating human midgets.

Drained and Washed Cleansays:

January 7, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Well, the examples that you chose to illustrate your point show that you are confused. Believing something hard enough does not make it true. I could say that I believe with all my heart purple bunnies used to rule the world, but unless I have proof of these claims then they are not considered fact. The possibilities of the universe are endless, but just because you want things to be the way you think they should be does not make those things true. The fact that life came into existence is hard to believe because it was highly improbable. But, improbable is not impossible, and improbable does not mean god. You line of logic does not lead to your conclusion.

I don’t need the answer to why. There is no why. It just is. So, yes, your question is as I originally stated it because you require that why answer. The universe does not hold hidden meaning, it is just the place where our planet lives. There is no why. There is how. We are getting close to how. Why isn’t necessary. We are here. Make the most of it. Get over yourself. You are not that important.

Hernandosays:

January 5, 2011 at 4:35 PM

DWC,

You speak with such clarity. Thank you. Your tone is admirable. I, however, would be a little more harsh. The “Kingdom in the Sky” is a pathetic manipulation by greedy, power hungry “spiritual” phonies. There is no god(s). There is no meaning of life. There is just what we make of life. Be nice, leave the earth a little better than you found it. Try to have a good time but not at someone elses expense. That’s not a religion, it’s just common sense. Of course, now I know that pasta may lead me to another level of enlightenment. The only question I have is: marinara or alfredo…maybe just some EVO and garlic?

When all is said and done, all we will be is someones memory and some worm food. And that won’t be for long. If you made good dinners, it might be a little longer, but not much.

Aww shucks :) Thanks! There are days that I have patience and days I don’t. I think I had some that day. I do agree with you. The church was founded by power mongering, greedy men who have deceived the world into thinking they are worth something and have an eternal purpose. It is bullshit. But the answer to your question is simple. Alfredo with garlic because I prefer it on breadsticks :)

Cheers to all the dinners we have left

theFewtheProudtheMarinarasays:

January 2, 2011 at 7:58 AM

I doubt that life is hard to believe, and science is continuously finding out how it started and evolved. Science is also ready and willing to change its assumptions. Religions on the other hand, have never proved one thing in their existence, and are not only unwilling to change their positions but openly hostile towards the advancement of knowledge. After all, an educated populace becomes less and less religious.

Unfortunately for them, religions paint themselves in a corner all the time. They’re constantly being outdated when they talk about the status of women or birth control, or even if you can eat meat on Friday. Oh, god changed his mind about that? And what exactly does “Friday” mean to someone who exists outside of time and space and doesn’t punch a time clock??

Spammyboysays:

March 26, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Life is incredibly hard to believe! Where is your evidence that anything is alive?! I know for a fact that I am a spontaneously generated corpse puppet…

wow this thread has evolved from 3.6 bilion wrongs dont make a right to the defonition of belief lets give them a round of aplause people good job going on a completely diferent topic. (we really nead a misc thread in the fourm)

Actually 78% of Americans are Christian. Eighty-three percent belong to a religious denomination. The idea that evolution is not a fact is simply not true. Just like one who studies atomic theory does not question whether or atoms exist or one who studies political theory does not question whether politics exist, one who studies evolutionary theory is not questioning whether evolution occurred. The largest organization of scientists, the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, considers it to be a fact as do pretty much all reputable scientific organizations. So the idea that intelligent design, which is an unproven hypothesis, not a theory, should be given equal time in science classrooms, is simply absurd.